Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DM Schwartz





Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 45
Reputation: 34.4Reputation: 34.4Reputation: 34.4

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:36 pm    Post subject: Same Sex Marriage Reply with quote

Given that the left ( Layton and company ) are going crazy about Afghanistan, softwood, etc...is it worth fighting another battle over same sex marriage come the fall session?

Would it be better to put that issue on the back burner for the time being and stick to current issues?
McGuire





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 369
Reputation: 20.2Reputation: 20.2
Location: Soviet Pictouwestistan

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He made a promise & he has to honour but it thankfully will face a swift defeat & we'll be able to put it behind us.
Donald Hughes





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 166
Reputation: 16.2Reputation: 16.2
Location: Libertarian socialism

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is an issue designed to fund-raise, door-knock and polarize. If the Conservatives feel they need another one of these issues they will bring it back. Otherwise it may be useful for them to have it burning in the background, like abortion.
palomino_pony





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Reputation: 93.9Reputation: 93.9
votes: 3
Location: Lower Mainland, BC

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Donald Hughes wrote:
It is an issue designed to fund-raise, door-knock and polarize. If the Conservatives feel they need another one of these issues they will bring it back. Otherwise it may be useful for them to have it burning in the background, like abortion.


It can also push the other parties as well as other groups to fund-raise and door-knock.

Open up a free vote as promised during the campaign and those MPs who are opposed to it take a "sick day" on the day of the vote. Then let this slowly die. The house is stacked against them and it is a vote that cannot be won. An issue like this will definitely turn the voting public off of the CPC. They did not defeat the Liberals because of their position on same sex marriage. Any good will that the CPC has earned with steady and principled leadership with all be for nothing if this issue comes up to the forefront.

IMO, I cannot think of thing that is more of waste of time to debate in the house and can cause more harm to the CPC.
Matt





Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 192
Reputation: 40.4Reputation: 40.4Reputation: 40.4Reputation: 40.4
votes: 3
Location: York-Centre

PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Politically speaking, it would be best for Harper to drop the issue. It really only applies to the main base (which inclused myself), a handful of liberals, and a couple of dippers.

While it would upset the base, it would not be enough to lose their vote. Hower, going ahead with it is sure to be enough to keep a noticeable (and perhaps a needed) amount of new votes from coming his way.

However, he would have to call the issue dead. Even still, he would have to put up with a lot of partisan "Harper will introduce it if you give him a majority!" crap. The baggage from not having the promised free vote might not be worth it.

It's a tough call. Personally, I think I'd risk it. Use the scapegoat of there being way more important issues on the national and global level. The people want more accountability, more openess, a crackdown on crime, and dozens of other things that are just more important to the minds of voters.

The right will beat the left everytime on any of these issues.

As an aside, I'm a social conservative who is against same-sex marriage. However, currently I care more about the success of the party and getting this beautiful country set on the right course.
McGuire





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 369
Reputation: 20.2Reputation: 20.2
Location: Soviet Pictouwestistan

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
However, he would have to call the issue dead. Even still, he would have to put up with a lot of partisan "Harper will introduce it if you give him a majority!"


Which is exactly why he needs to deal with it once & for all.
the silent platform





Joined: 09 Sep 2006
Posts: 81
Reputation: 40.9Reputation: 40.9Reputation: 40.9Reputation: 40.9
votes: 1
Location: Winnipeg

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

McGuire wrote:
Which is exactly why he needs to deal with it once & for all.


exactly. he should get the issue out of the way early, much like he did during the last campaign.
McGuire





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 369
Reputation: 20.2Reputation: 20.2
Location: Soviet Pictouwestistan

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do what he did w/ the Afghan vote, surprise everyone with it, have a quick debate, vote & we're thru w/ it.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Although I disagree with gay marriage, I think the damage has already been done. To bestow rights, then just revoke them - i think this would be a mistake. Socially speaking, it is difficult to come up with any arguments against gay marriage that don't make you sound comparable to a bigot. Canadians as a whole expect their leaders to be accepting of the various demographics in their society. My biggest argument has always been what i call the "floodgate effect" - ie. that it literally opens the door for a whole range of ideologies, many of which could be extremely detrimental to society(repeat of the roman empire perhaps?).
I have always been an advocate of a "union" as opposed to marriage - equality in rights and priviledges(and responsibility), but simply under a different name.

I think that the government should allow the issue to die - but also cut back on any funding supporting pro-gay and lesbian initiatives. Remove laws labelling them as different(ie. discrimination laws), and truly make them the equal citizens they claim to want to be.

I'm currently much more concerned with economic and foreign policy issues affecting Canadians, than I am about gay marriage and other social issues. I think most Canadians would tend to agree with this - we have bigger fish to fry. Gay marriage threatens a possible Conservative majority - lets let the issue go in the interests of having a reliable, competent government.
Christian Conservative





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 86
Reputation: 50.8
votes: 2
Location: Southwestern ON

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I'll bet no one is surprised to see that I'm against SSM. ;-)

I don't know how I feel on this one. I want to see marriage returned to its protected status, and a new civil union created... but I want the vote TO BE HAD WHEN IT CAN BE WON. But I also see how the Opposition will try to kill us on the issue in the next election if we don't deal with it now. (though it didn't really work last time)

Personally, and I know some are going to hate me for saying this... this issue is more important to me than a majority... so I think we should hold off on this issue till we can win the vote.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No one's going to hate you for it ... well, maybe the progs will :lol:

I'm in the 'disagree with SSM, but we've pretty much lost that battle' camp. Some may disagree, but I'm almost certain that fears of repealing SSM cost us seats in Metropolitan Canada. We need to put this issue to bed and move on, IMO. Any talk of waiting until we can win the vote will only validate the 'hidden agenda' meme the left loves to circulate.
Tim K





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 40
Reputation: 28.3Reputation: 28.3Reputation: 28.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it all depends on how he would frame the issue.

If he is too frank then the opposition can play the bogeyman card and the hidden agenda card. Those who were scared of him before he was elected and who are now "used" to him may mobilize.

The "mainstreamness" that he's fought so hard for, could be jeopardized.

I for one am all for the marriage of two consenting, loving adults regardless of their body parts. Religious doctrine is a tool created by humanity and can be altered. It has been in the past and it can be now.
PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as I'm concerned it is none of the governments or anyone else's business WHO wants to get married. Man and woman , Woman and Woman, man man, and woman, or woman woman woman and man. It is nobodies right to stop them. If it is a consensual relationship its fine by me. I hope Harper does try to raise the issue because I would love to see him go down in flames. He will be my enemy so long as he supports caging human being for their association with a particular plant.
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrGreenthumb wrote:
As far as I'm concerned it is none of the governments or anyone else's business WHO wants to get married.


It shouldn't be the government's business at all. Why is the government in the business of defining a cultural institution. They should step away from marriage completely and leave it to cultural groups (including gays and lesbians as one such cultural group) to define their own cultural institutions. The government has no place in this.

DrGreenthumb wrote:
I hope Harper does try to raise the issue because I would love to see him go down in flames. He will be my enemy so long as he supports caging human being for their association with a particular plant.


Let's dial down the rhetoric a bit please. Harper will be your enemy? He has a different point of view. Advocate your position, discuss and choose your candidate. This is democracy. While I don't agree with Jack Layton, he isn't my "enemy". I believe he's doing what he thinks is best for Canada. I have a common admiration for all of those that choose public service.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DrGreenthumb wrote:
He will be my enemy so long as he supports caging human being for their association with a particular plant.


This is the problem with the Left... No respect for anyone with different views...

yet they claime to be "progressive"...

In the same breath they advocate their "acceptance of others", they indicate their lack of acceptance for anyone's thoughts and feelings unless they fall in line with their own..
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Same Sex Marriage

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB